About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

LOG IN
LOG IN


13 Geo. Immigr. L.J. 343 (1998-1999)
The End of Protection: Legal Standards for Cessation of Refugee Status and Withdrawal of Temporary Protection

handle is hein.journals/geoimlj13 and id is 353 raw text is: THE END OF PROTECTION: LEGAL STANDARDS FOR CESSATION OF REFUGEE STATUS AND WITHDRAWAL OF TEMPORARY PROTECTION JOAN FITZPATRICK* I. INTRODUCTION Repatriation is touted as the optimal solution to refugee crises in the post-Cold War era.' This enthusiasm stems partly from a perceived reduction in persecutory risks in some transitional states. Such perceptions, unfortu- nately, may be unrealistic or disingenuous in their focus upon superficial political change.2 Indeed, the human rights situation in refugee-generating states is often volatile, and political change may leave risks unaltered or simply substitute new sources of danger. The current preoccupation with cessation of refugee protection-and with the linkage between cessation and involuntary repatriation-reflects an erosion of political support for the other classic durable solutions for refugees, local integration, and resettlement. The burdens of refugee protection and fears of demographic change resulting * Professor of Law, University of Washington School of Law. B.A., Rice University, J.D., Harvard Law School, Diploma in Law, Oxford University. I wish to express my thanks to the University of Washington Law School Foundation for research support. 1. For example, the annual theme of the Forty-Eighth session of the Executive Committee of the High Commissioner's Programme in 1997 was Repatriation Challenges. See U.N. GAOR 48th Sess., U.N. Doc. A/AC.96/887 (1997). Marjoleine Zieck notes that a preference for voluntary repatriation over resettlement began to emerge in the text of United Nations General Assembly resolutions during the 1970s and was clear as early as 1983. See MARJOLEINE ZIECK, UNHCR AND VOLUNTARY REPATRIATION OF REFUGEES: A LEGAL ANALYSIS 81 (1997). She also traces a shift in the role of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (the UNHCR) from relatively passive facilitation of voluntary repatriation to active creation of conditions for return. See id. at 88-89. 2. The sobering recent trend toward illiberal democracies, involving elected governments that abjure the rule of law and perpetuate extensive human rights violations, has been noted in the international relations literature. Such regimes are likely to precipitate continuing refugee flows. See generally Fareed Zakaria, The Rise of Illiberal Democracy, 76 FOREIGN As. 22 (1997). Where a regime change occurs violently, a diminution in persecutory risks is an even more dubious prospect. 3. Local integration involves durable residence status in the state of refuge, while resettlement involves a grant of durable residence in a third state. Support for local integration and resettlement continues at the rhetorical level, as evidenced by the Conclusions on International Protection adopted by the Executive Committee of the High Commissioner's Programme (the ExCom) in October 1998: [V]oluntary repatriation, local integration and resettlement, that is, the traditional solutions for refugees, all remain viable and important responses to refugee situations, even while voluntary repatriation is the pre-eminent solution Report of the Forty-ninth Session of the Executive Committee of the High Commissioner's Programme, Report on the Work of the Standing Committee, U.N. GAOR, 49th Sess., at para. 21 (gg), U.N. Doc. A/AC.96/911(1998), reprinted in <http://www.unhcr.ch/refworld/unhcr/excom/reports/91 .htm>. Many states continue to grant durable asylum and to extend resettlement offers. For example, the United States granted asylum to nearly 16,000 refugees in fiscal year 1997. See REFUGEE REP., Dec. 31, 1997, at 6-7. The UNHCR found resettlement places for 27,000 refugees in 1996, of whom 13,000 resettled in the